Why is Seinfeld unfunny?

Not that there's anything wrong with that!

Why is Seinfeld unfunny?

Now you done did it

Lol. I'm referencing the trope, not making a judgment of the show.

But the things it created were so brilliant and popular, they became woven into the fabric of that show's genre. They ended up being taken for granted, copied and endlessly repeated. Although they often began by saying something new, they in turn became the new status quo.

You...

I just...

But you...

.
.
.
.
u r poop.

“No man ever steps in the same river twice, for it's not the same river and he's not the same man.”― Heraclitus

This is the problem Halo faces today. It's impossible to capture and recreate that feeling and experience of playing the originals when you did. It's a folly to try. Why is Seinfeld unfunny? The same reason Halo has nowhere to go on its current course.

How apt. There is no going back, indeed, and it would be foolish to gauge on recapturing the particularly temporal recipe of nostalgia. Thus, I should make mention that nostalgia is not my gauge. This is how, of what you say, I can disagree to a point. It is not impossible.

OG Halo is simple. Yes, things were added upon as ever is apparently required in a sequel, but a core aspect of Halo in those Bungie days stayed by and large true throughout. It might not be the same river, but the river at least should still be wet to be called a river at all. It really is that simple.

I want to see if 343 knows what that "simplicity" is (yet). If they can, if they have understood-actually understand what makes Halo it's own thing, even in a SEA of shooters made possible BY Halo, then I'm in. Hint: it's not the control scheme. While very important, I'd say what Bungie has done with Destiny control wise is the next push, much like Halo was in its day. But even Destiny doesn't have this "simplicity" that Bungies Halos have, much to my disappointment.

This is also why I'm not saying what that "X Factor" is, despite my want to say otherwise. There is a hint I could give right now that to me is SO felicitous, directly for you Cody, BUT I say too much already. Sorry for the buzzkill.

P.S. nothing is funny any more. Everyone knows it.

Why is Seinfeld unfunny?

Now you done did it

First of all "then don't use it" is just a gosh darned lazy bullshit answer, I really don't want to go into why. Please don't make me.

Oh, when used seriously, it is, but in context it's tongue-in-cheek, not a serious answer. The CM was definitely taking a piss at the really-badly-worded question.

Second, I'm not hate'n on the Grappling Hook. I'm hating on the sell. As I did in the linked post therein, I do so now. Seen shit before, and calling out with my 2¢. All of which might I add is very warranted. Compared to where this Halo appeared about year ago, it's obviously had time to improve, but I do not know how much. It's probably no longer a Cyberpunk 2077 debacle anyway.

That's where the sell comes in. And I'm not seeing it... yet. Yet.

Yeah, I get where you're coming from. I guess it's a way to introduce verticality with clear limits, unlike jetpacks.

Edit: One more thing. It occurs to me that if this was say when Halo 5 came out, may have been different. That on the face of it, the little that is shown would be enough to bring about some sort of excitement. In such a span there have been more and more large free roaming game play worlds. Witcher 3, Red Dead 2, Pray 2, Ubisofts Games... eh so on. What brings it all together? What makes one game feel like a whole package, while other games can feel like a bunch of scattered lonely tricks. Cool on the surface but ultimately hallow to play. I'm not sure I have the words to answer that right now, but "feel" wise, I'm just not seeing it in Halo Infinite yet.

They could nail the feel, and I still think it would come up short.

“No man ever steps in the same river twice, for it's not the same river and he's not the same man.”― Heraclitus

This is the problem Halo faces today. It's impossible to capture and recreate that feeling and experience of playing the originals when you did. It's a folly to try. Why is Seinfeld unfunny? The same reason Halo has nowhere to go on its current course.

Right but we are talking about simulations here.

An emergent phenomenon is the result of an error of the simulation cascading into major effects. For instance, some thing outside the simulation is effecting it. But the game code is the final word and by definition the correct simulation. I guess when that cosmic ray hit that one speedrunner's console and Mario zoomed to the ceiling counts as emergent gameplay, but that's once in a lifetime.

"Emergent Gameplay" is not being defined in a technical sense, it is being defined in a design sense. It's not necessarily unplanned for behavior in the simulation, but unplanned for by the designer.

Second, I'm not hate'n on the Grappling Hook. I'm hating on the sell. As I did in the linked post therein, I do so now. Seen shit before, and calling out with my 2¢. All of which might I add is very warranted. Compared to where this Halo appeared about year ago, it's obviously had time to improve, but I do not know how much. It's probably no longer a Cyberpunk 2077 debacle anyway.

That's where the sell comes in. And I'm not seeing it... yet. Yet.

Sort of, honestly. I think it’s a missed opportunity at the very least if you’ve never had a situation in Destiny where you wished you had a shotgun. Did you not use a Shotgun for Taniks?

Yes, and after 25 runs, that Masterworked shotgun had 8 kills on its kill counter.

(This season, you can beat its damage with fusions. Just like Templar - old meta was double shotties + Anarchy, now it's Null Composure/1KV.)

No, but I’d argue that a developer telling someone to just not use a gameplay mechanic is silly (just as asking for a mode without it is silly).

If the mechanic is non-essential and no encounters are designed around its use, why is there to begin with? I’d argue that’s bad game design, as a general rule.

Wait, really? So the fact that I can have a perfectly good time in Destiny COMPLETELY IGNORING shotguns means that their inclusion in the game is bad game design?

(Actually, I'd agree with that, because shotguns are stupid, but I don't think that's the point.)

If the mechanic is non-essential and no encounters are designed around its use, why is there to begin with? I’d argue that’s bad game design, as a general rule.

As a player, I don't care, I just think it's a fun experience when I try something that the game doesn't explicitly spell out as an option, and it just works.

I'd say that's just called good sandbox design :-p

Right but we are talking about simulations here.

An emergent phenomenon is the result of an error of the simulation cascading into major effects. For instance, some thing outside the simulation is effecting it. But the game code is the final word and by definition the correct simulation. I guess when that cosmic ray hit that one speedrunner's console and Mario zoomed to the ceiling counts as emergent gameplay, but that's once in a lifetime.

Not to start a big debate, but I suppose the thing with term "emergent gameplay" is that it doesn't specify whether the gameplay appears emergent to the player, or the developer, or both.

As a player, I don't care, I just think it's a fun experience when I try something that the game doesn't explicitly spell out as an option, and it just works.

An emergent phenomenon is the result of an error of the simulation cascading into major effects. For instance, some thing outside the simulation is effecting it. But the game code is the final word and by definition the correct simulation. I guess when that cosmic ray hit that one speedrunner's console and Mario zoomed to the ceiling counts as emergent gameplay, but that's once in a lifetime.

Lol. You know that I don't think "emergent gameplay" is a thing.

You may have interactions that were not foreseen, but that isn't emergent.

You may have interactions that were not foreseen, but that isn't emergent.